LEGO Ideas Discussion

[jonwil]

On 17/03/2017 at 4:44 PM, Actor Builder said:

Wall-E can't be specifically designated as all-male, can it? I don't believe we decisively know the gender of Wall-E's cockroach, after all. And Wall-E is a robot. Wall-E has typically masculine qualities (Mainly enjoying trash), but you can't really assign a gender to a robot, with a few exceptions I'm sure exist but am too lazy to think up.

I would say there are plenty of robots in fiction that you can clearly specify as male or female.

Plenty of robots in the Futurama universe that are clearly identified as one gender or the other.

Data in Star Trek is clearly male and identified as such.

Rosie the Robot from the Jetsons is obviously a female.

Even Transformers has robots that are identified as male or female.

 

[ThunderDrako]

I agree with jonwil, you can take for example the droids from Star Wars

"Droids, being machines, lacked a biological sex. However, in order to appear more lifelike, many droids were programmed with a "masculine" or "feminine" personality. Thus, even mechanical beings were designated either he or she" 

So canonically R2-D2 is a male xD

I'm glad TLG wants to make more "female" sets. I personally don't have a lot of female minifigures and the heads look the same :-/

[anothergol]

This confirms that Lego Ideas is, sadly, only about ideas, not execution -at all-.

While I loved both versions of this show, this is just an insult to it/them. As already said, the building is very poorly done, really bad. It could have been saved by custom-designed & printed minifigs, but no, here too it's just a bunch of mixed parts that bear absolutely no resemblance to the cast, at all. I think I would only recognize Dwigth, except his haircut looks like the one in the UK version, while this entry is about the US version...

So I can only imagine people voted for the show, and not this project at all. It's not like Lego will pick it anyway, but it baffles me that 10k people have voted for this.
If it's just for the idea, no need for pictures. Write down "<insert favorite show> in Lego" and voilà, here's an idea.

Not counting that there is now a better The Office entry (build is much better [well it's the minimum expected, even if it's just a render], cast is slightly more recognizable [at least Kevin is spot on]) https://ideas.lego.com/projects/167307

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by anothergol

[dulsi]

54 minutes ago, anothergol said:

This confirms that Lego Ideas is, sadly, only about ideas, not execution -at all-.

It is about the idea and execution. The execution doesn't have to be amazing but needs to give a reasonable approximation of what is envisioned. I believe the 10K office project does that. Sure someone might create a better version but it doesn't matter since Lego wouldn't use either of them. Both show approximately the same area from the show. Some people supported the Back to the Future project only to be disappointed at the final version created by Lego.

[dr_spock]

You have to be willing to give up creative control if you put a project on Ideas and it is voted and approved for production. Otherwise, don't use Ideas. 

The LEGO Group makes all final decisions on how a project becomes a LEGO set, including the final model design, applicable licenses, production run size, sales channels, etc.

 

[anothergol]

20 hours ago, dulsi said:

Some people supported the Back to the Future project only to be disappointed at the final version created by Lego.

Yeah, because Lego managed to make an average project even worse. Now imagine if they turned this one into even worse..

(but let's get real, it won't pass the selection. That would be really weird, like, if "women of the Nasa" was passing. Oh wait..)

[Lyichir]

On 3/22/2017 at 7:40 AM, AFOLguy1970 said:

"The Office" has 15 minifigs in it.  It will get rejected in review because TLG was planning on introducing a set in the City line next year titled "Fun In the Office" and there is too much overlap.  

Realistically, the set could easily be reduced in scope to focus only on the most major characters (Jim, Pam, Michael, Dwight, and probably a few others to round it out) and a few specific scenes as opposed to the full office layout. While people did support the full project I would expect that most fans would remain interested even if it weren't as comprehensive—if anything, reducing it in size would probably INCREASE interest as it becomes more accessible to more casual fans of the series.

Also, while the City theme has been branching out I still think a subject as banal as a routine office job probably would hold little interest to the theme's target audience of young kids, even if you included "fun" in the name.

[LEGODalekbuster523]

On 21/03/2017 at 9:12 PM, Robert8 said:

"NBC's The Office", by Dwight SchruteOn, achieved the 10k supporters today!

 

Should be based on the more well-known UK Office.

[Faefrost]

On 3/21/2017 at 9:07 PM, Artanis I said:

I didn't think the big bang theory would pass review, so who knows. This show is less childish than it (aka better and not canned laughter), and although really funny I think I preferred the original UK version (definitely not appropriate - Martin Freeman made it as a minifig elsewise, and no, not through Sherlock!).

Not as many nerd/geek references as the big flatulence theory, but the Starcraft Kerrigan halloween costume was hilarious. And plenty of people know Steve Carell by now

The Big Bang Theory had some things working in its favor that made it essentially "cheap advertising" for Lego. It's a modern still in production show, that shows among other things, grown ups playing with Lego. The mere existance of the set pretty much guarantees further product placement on the broadly internationally syndicated show. So it really paid for itself for Lego, before a single set gets sold. 

Sometimes things that seem similar are actually not, when you peek behind the curtain. 

[Aanchir]

1 hour ago, LEGODalekbuster523 said:

Should be based on the more well-known UK Office.

How the heck do you figure the UK version is more well-known? The US version ran nine seasons (201 episodes), and its highest-rated episode had 22.9 million viewers. The UK version had just 12 episodes and two Christmas specials, and its highest-rated episode was the first Christmas special with just 6.8 million viewers.

[Kizmoz]

It baffles me how projects like that can achieve 10k, admittedly it was created in 2015 so its been a bit of the grind for it to get there but of my own opinion (and as it appears, others) it doesn't scream out anything special :/

My main project feels its barely gonna make it to 5k supporters and I'd of thought it has a more wider audience in comparison

[Blondie-Wan]

3 hours ago, Kizmoz said:

It baffles me how projects like that can achieve 10k, admittedly it was created in 2015 so its been a bit of the grind for it to get there but of my own opinion (and as it appears, others) it doesn't scream out anything special :/

My main project feels its barely gonna make it to 5k supporters and I'd of thought it has a more wider audience in comparison

What's your project?

[Umbra-Manis]

11 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

What's your project?

I'd assume it's the flash Project in his signature. 

[Blondie-Wan]

Ah. I'm on the mobile version of the site at the moment and don't see signatures. Let me switch over...

:: switches ::

... aaaaaand switched. Ah, I see two projects based on The Flash. I will check them out!

Edited March 25, 2017 by Blondie-Wan
Italicizing title

[Blondie-Wan]

On March 24, 2017 at 9:45 AM, anothergol said:

That would be really weird, like, if "women of the Nasa" was passing. Oh wait..

Yeah, it sure is weird that they'd approve a project that carries both educational value and a positive message, garnered national attention not only in LEGO-related circles but also beyond them (getting people who normally don't pay attention to LEGO to do so), got fully supported in barely over two weeks, and is easily produced.

You'd think they'd want to approve only unpopular projects that only just barely make it 10k in two years and two months, appeal to only a tiny corner of a niche of a subset of people who already spend all their money on LEGO anyway, require years of complex development to produce colossal sets with thousands upon thousands of bricks, and actively encourage children to smoke.

[LEGODalekbuster523]

On 24/03/2017 at 9:06 PM, Aanchir said:

How the heck do you figure the UK version is more well-known? The US version ran nine seasons (201 episodes), and its highest-rated episode had 22.9 million viewers. The UK version had just 12 episodes and two Christmas specials, and its highest-rated episode was the first Christmas special with just 6.8 million viewers.

The US version is based on the UK version, and is generally considered the best Office. The US version is thought to be an unfunny, embarrassing drivel trying desperately to copy the huge success of the UK Office.

[Aanchir]

33 minutes ago, LEGODalekbuster523 said:

The US version is based on the UK version, and is generally considered the best Office. The US version is thought to be an unfunny, embarrassing drivel trying desperately to copy the huge success of the UK Office.

Lots of people believe otherwise. The world doesn't revolve around what you or the people around you like or dislike. Comedy isn't an objective thing, and what is unfunny to some people might be laugh-out-loud hilarious to others (especially people from different cultural backgrounds). Even some British viewers prefer the American version due to its more extensive character development, less abrasive lead character, and comedy that isn't based so heavily on making you cringe.

But regardless of which version is better, saying the British version is more well known is still flat-out wrong.

[anothergol]

10 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

Yeah, it sure is weird that they'd approve a project that carries both educational value and a positive message, garnered national attention not only in LEGO-related circles but also beyond them (getting people who normally don't pay attention to LEGO to do so), got fully supported in barely over two weeks, and is easily produced.

That is indeed the main & biggest value of Lego Ideas for Lego. But it was already -done-. It doesn't matter whether Lego produces it or not, it, as you wrote, already gathered attention, medias, etc.

Producing it is another story. Do you really believe that a big fraction of the ones who voted are gonna buy that set? -unless- it is spammed in the media for a second time, I don't see this happening. Those who voted for this don't care much bout Lego, more about feminism. Their message has passed, I don't see them buying a Lego set now.
And I don't see what's positive about this. "People of the Nasa", yeah that would be. Here it's what's called "positive discrimination", it's still discrimination at best. At worst, the message is "women can do it too", you don't see the irony of this message? Sounds more mysoginistic than feminist, to me.

The Research Institute was less feminist, first in its title, it wasn't "women in research", plus it's a domain in which you'll find quite a lot of women, objectively. It's even quite possible that there are more women than men in this domain. "Women of Nasa".. come on..

Edited March 26, 2017 by anothergol

[1980-Something-Space-Guy]

5 hours ago, LEGODalekbuster523 said:

The US version is based on the UK version, and is generally considered the best Office. The US version is thought to be an unfunny, embarrassing drivel trying desperately to copy the huge success of the UK Office.

Quite an unbiased comment . Bet you'd dislike WatchMojo's take comparing both. Seems like they'd be in the "minority", then:

 

[Blondie-Wan]

52 minutes ago, anothergol said:

Producing it is another story. Do you really believe that a big fraction of the ones who voted are gonna buy that set? 

Indeed I do. And while it won't be a perfect 1:1 match, and not every single person who supported it on Ideas will buy it, they'll be made up for by the people who didn't support it but will still buy it. I will say I have total confidence that LEGO will easily be able to sell more copies of this than there are people who supported it (10,000).

52 minutes ago, anothergol said:

-unless- it is spammed in the media for a second time, I don't see this happening. Those who voted for this don't care much bout Lego, more about feminism. Their message has passed, I don't see them buying a Lego set now.

And why not? What do you think makes it sooo unlikely that this particular set won't sell to the people who supported it? I happen to know of people who both supported this set and fully intend to acquire it (myself included).

There's nothing about feminism that would preclude someone from having an interest in both it and in LEGO, just like there isn't anything about an interest in cars, Star Wars, or any of a zillion other things that precludes someone from having an interest in LEGO. You know how ridiculous it would sound if you said "those who voted for this don't care much bout Lego, more about cars" as a reason to blow off a car-related Ideas set (for example)? Well, it's just as ridiculous when you say it about feminism.

Besides, the set is about more than just feminism. It's also about science and space - you know, those subjects people care so little about that they make up the subject matter of only about a third or so of all LEGO CUUSOO / Ideas sets approved to date, including this one.

LEGO's review board analyzes each Ideas project that makes it to review on a variety of criteria, including the business case - "will it sell?", to put it simply. They have all sorts of data on the support this project garnered - not just how (amazingly) quickly it got to 10,000, but also poll data on who supported it, whether they're really inclined to buy it, and so on. They also have the sales data from this set's nearest analogues in the line - the Research Institute, of course, but also Curiosity, Hayabusa, etc. They had access to all the same information you and I have, and far more, and they decided to go ahead and give this project the thumbs-up. Hmmm.

52 minutes ago, anothergol said:

And I don't see what's positive about this. "People of the Nasa", yeah that would be. Here it's what's called "positive discrimination", it's still discrimination at best. At worst, the message is "women can do it too", you don't see the irony of this message? Sounds more mysoginistic than feminist, to me.

It's about addressing a lack of representation in other sets (as well as the larger, non-LEGO world). Despite the real achievements of these real women, and occasional high-profile portrayals like Hidden Figures, women aren't really shown as scientists, engineers, explorers, etc. nearly as often as men in toys, media, or just about anywhere else. Even LEGO itself has far more male characters than female ones in most of its sets. This set will simply make up a very small bit of that gap (which will still be huge).

And women and their accomplishments are just not viewed the same way as men and men's are. If this had been a "Men of NASA" set, do you suppose you or anyone else would be making the same outcry? Why is that?

[Dazz]

5 hours ago, Blondie-Wan said:

It's about addressing a lack of representation in other sets (as well as the larger, non-LEGO world). Despite the real achievements of these real women, and occasional high-profile portrayals like Hidden Figures, women aren't really shown as scientists, engineers, explorers, etc. nearly as often as men in toys, media, or just about anywhere else. Even LEGO itself has far more male characters than female ones in most of its sets. This set will simply make up a very small bit of that gap (which will still be huge).

How is this set going to help promoting women in science when Ideas sets usually are very restricted in their distribution?

If LEGO has a real interest in promoting women in science, and a fair representation of women in LEGO sets in general, they have to make changes to the line-ups of their widely available lines like CIty and so on.

[Aanchir]

10 hours ago, anothergol said:

That is indeed the main & biggest value of Lego Ideas for Lego. But it was already -done-. It doesn't matter whether Lego produces it or not, it, as you wrote, already gathered attention, medias, etc.

Producing it is another story. Do you really believe that a big fraction of the ones who voted are gonna buy that set? -unless- it is spammed in the media for a second time, I don't see this happening. Those who voted for this don't care much bout Lego, more about feminism. Their message has passed, I don't see them buying a Lego set now.
And I don't see what's positive about this. "People of the Nasa", yeah that would be. Here it's what's called "positive discrimination", it's still discrimination at best. At worst, the message is "women can do it too", you don't see the irony of this message? Sounds more mysoginistic than feminist, to me.

The Research Institute was less feminist, first in its title, it wasn't "women in research", plus it's a domain in which you'll find quite a lot of women, objectively. It's even quite possible that there are more women than men in this domain. "Women of Nasa".. come on..

Two things:

First, the "these people who supported this aren't real fans and won't buy it" predictions are trotted out with EVERY project anybody dislikes. Even ones that turned out to be massively successful, like Minecraft or the Research Institute.

At some point we have to accept that these kinds of doubts are generally unfounded and that if a lot of people like a project and the cost of the final product isn't prohibitive, then a lot of people are likely to buy it. Maybe not as many people as would buy a typical Star Wars or City or Friends or Ninjago set, but that kind of sales volume isn't expected of any Ideas set.

Second, the Research Institute set was based on an Ideas project that was literally called "Female Minifigures Set". It's pretty normal for a project's name to change when it becomes a set.

[Blondie-Wan]

2 hours ago, Dazz said:

How is this set going to help promoting women in science when Ideas sets usually are very restricted in their distribution?

That's fair. Of course, I don't think anyone is saying they expect this one LEGO set to magically correct all such disparity. It's a small step, but still a step nonetheless - more of one than everything else staying the same but this one set not coming out would be.

Distribution is probably a function in part of (limited) production resources allocated for Ideas sets before they're even approved. It does at least seem to be improving, though, as the last few Ideas sets have been easier to find in stores than the earlier ones in general (though the ones based on licensed pop-culture entertainment properties have also been more available than the others).

2 hours ago, Dazz said:

If LEGO has a real interest in promoting women in science, and a fair representation of women in LEGO sets in general, they have to make changes to the line-ups of their widely available lines like CIty and so on.

They do indeed, and in fact have been doing so, AFAICT. I've noticed the last few years' worth of City sets feature more women in roles like cops (and criminals, even!), firefighters, astronauts, etc. than in years past. Outside City, though, there seems not to have been much progress in the other minifigures-based themes, though they do obviously now have the minidolls, which are more overtly targeted at girls, and in which themes women are far more represented than men.

[LEGODalekbuster523]

16 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Lots of people believe otherwise.

The vast majority seem to prefer the UK Office to me. David Brent is far more memorable and iconic a character than anything in the US Office. Who even are the characters in the US Office? Certainly nobody with the pop culture equivalent of David Brent.

[Ashnflash]

1 hour ago, LEGODalekbuster523 said:

The vast majority seem to prefer the UK Office to me. David Brent is far more memorable and iconic a character than anything in the US Office. Who even are the characters in the US Office? Certainly nobody with the pop culture equivalent of David Brent.

I can list every single character from the office, Dwight, Pam, Jim, Angela, Philis, Oscar, Kevin, Andy, Toby, Darrel, Stanley, Creed, Erin, Ryan, and Kelly. I and would say that Michael Scott is a much bigger character than David Brent. It pretty much is what Steve Carrel's career and is such a huge and popular actor. Ricky Gervais not a lot of people know him, last thing I've seen him in would be Night at the Museum. 

Also there's a reason why the US one had 9 seasons and compared to have only 3... If you add up all the episodes of the UK one you don't even get a full season..........

Edited March 26, 2017 by Ashnflash